OUR VIEW: The News recommends voting no on proposed constitutional amendments in an effort to force a new Alabama Constitution

For years, the siren song for constitution reformers in Alabama has been: Vote "no" on all proposed amendments on the ballot, and force the Legislature's hand on an embarrassing, inefficient and racist constitution.

Always, though, some amendment demanded a "yes" vote in the name of progress, and the temptation to gum up the works faded. If it wasn't removing the ban on interracial marriage, it was setting up a fund to help lure new industry to Alabama, or raising money mostly for schools while making the unjust state tax system more fair and government more accountable, or removing racist language about separate schools and poll taxes.

This year, there is no compelling amendment requiring a "yes" vote. Instead, the four statewide and 33 local amendments on the ballot remind us of the 1901 constitution's biggest flaw.

The lack of self-government, or home rule, hamstrings local governments. Blame the constitution's drafters, who didn't trust the people or local governments. That forces county commissions and city councils to seek the Legislature's blessing on amendments that let them do what the constitution prohibits.

That's why this year, Baldwin County needs approval to set up a county storm water management authority; why Calhoun County needs help to allow the city of Anniston to fund a scholarship program; why Covington, Geneva, Macon, Russell, St. Clair and Tallapoosa counties have to ask for permission to raise court costs (as dozens of counties already have); why Madison County wants the OK to control dangerous dogs, and on and on.

The fact counties must beg for permission to perform basic functions is the main reason well more than 800 amendments weigh down the Alabama Constitution. What we have isn't a fundamental charter spelling out citizens' rights and state government's responsibilities, but a string of statutory laws for state and local governments.

It makes for inefficient government on a grand scale. Statewide Amendment 4, for example, forces voters across the state to weigh in on whether Blount County can prohibit any city outside the county from imposing taxes or regulations on those who live in the county within the city's police jurisdiction. Why should voters around the state decide what happens in Blount County? If state voters say no, Blount County officials have to start over.

The gum-up-the-works strategy worked in Louisiana, forcing the Legislature there to deal with an outmoded constitution. We realize there could be a time down the road when an amendment is so important there's no choice but to recommend a "yes" vote, but those instances will be rare. One time, for sure, will be if lawmakers ever put before voters a constitutional amendment that would set up a citizens convention to draft a new state constitution.

For now, we recommend voting "no" next Tuesday on all state and local amendments.